The BBC censoring the news that doesn't fit their agenda - again

Yesterday I heard that the front-man of the Eagles of Death Metal band that had been playing at the Bataclan when it was attacked by Islamist terrorists had said that it wouldn't have happened if everyone had been armed. My immediate thought was, well the BBC won't like that, how will they report it?

The answer was simpler than I thought, they haven't reported his words at all. This BBC piece reports on the return of Jesse Hughes and the Eagles of Death Metal to Paris. The article includes plenty of 'peace and love' messages but nothing about his views on gun control.

Oddly the equally left-wing Guardian newspaper manages to report Jesse Hughes' views in their piece. Here's how that article starts:

'The frontman of the Eagles of Death Metal, the band that was performing at the Bataclan theatre in Paris when 90 people were murdered by terrorists last year, has remembered his terror at encountering a gunman backstage – and argued for universal access to guns.'

The Guardian tell us more:

'Vocalist-guitarist Jesse Hughes, who is a long-time advocate for access to gun ownership, told the French television station iTélé in a 19-minute, at times tearful interview on Monday that restrictions on guns in France had helped to enable the terrorists.

Asked if his views on gun control had changed after the terror attacks, the member of America’s National Rifle Association said gun control “doesn’t have anything to do with it”.

“Did your French gun control stop a single fucking person from dying at the Bataclan? And if anyone can answer yes, I’d like to hear it, because I don’t think so. I think the only thing that stopped it was some of the bravest men that I’ve ever seen in my life charging head-first into the face of death with their firearms.'

Now why could the BBC not report Jesse Hughes' views? Are they so wedded to being pro gun-control that any contrary views by someone that the public might feel sympathy for cannot be reported? Do they care so little for impartial reporting at the BBC?

If you read a bit further down The Guardian's article another interesting fact is revealed:

'In separate comments to Agence France-Presse, Hughes, a supporter of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, said: “I don’t go anywhere in America without a gun anymore. That sucks. And I’m not paranoid. I’m not a cowboy... but I want to be prepared.”'

Jesse Hughes, the front man of Eagles of Death Metal is a supporter of Donald Trump - I don't think an invitation to appear on the Question Time panel will be arriving any time soon.


The BBC allegedly unbiased by charter  but in reality biased by nature.

Background checks on all prospective gun owners in the USA?

I believe that Obama supporters are in favour of background checks on all prospective gun owners in the USA? How about in Syria?

Hi Sarah Silverman, did you mean Aaron Alexis? Is that why your video no longer plays?

Recently Sarah Silverman posted an absolutely hilarious (yes I'm being sarcastic) video on Funny or Die. She caught a fair bit of flack over it, not least from black right of centre Americans. But it seems that the reality of a black man, Aaron Alexis, going on a gun powered killing spree has lead to Funny or Die killing the video...

Poor timing with the original video Sarah?


Here's some of the responses from black men to Sarah Silverman's original black NRA video







You can read more about Sarah Silverman's previous exploits including recommending using emotional blackmail to get Jewish grandparents to vote for Barack Obama, here

A good argument for arming householders

Of course in the UK, the householder would be arrested for possession of a weapon and the criminal would sue the householder for concussion caused by hitting his head on the floor.

Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

If you are in the US and find yourself facing armed attack

Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

A missing angle in this BBC report

The BBC report that:

'Thirty-two bodies have been found in several locations in Mexico's eastern port city of Veracruz, the navy says.

The discovery comes two weeks after 35 bodies were dumped on a busy road in Veracruz state in broad daylight.

The Mexican government has announced the deployment of extra security forces in the state, as gangs wage an escalating war over drug trafficking.'

The BBC mention the role of the Mexican authorities but not the role of the Obama administration in getting guns into Mexico. The  story of how and why the Obama administration put guns into Mexican criminals hands is a scandal but not one that the Obama supporting BBC will cover in any detail, if at all.

Federal agent John Dodson says what he was asked to do was beyond belief.

He was intentionally letting guns go to Mexico?

“Yes ma’am,” Dodson told CBS News. “The agency was.”

ATF managers allegedly made a controversial decision: allow most of the weapons on the streets. The idea, they said, was to gather intelligence and see where the guns ended up. Insiders say it’s a dangerous tactic called letting the guns, “walk.”

One agent called the strategy “insane.” Another said: “We were fully aware the guns would probably be moved across the border to drug cartels where they could be used to kill.”
. . . .
For months, ATF agents followed 50-caliber Barrett rifles and other guns believed headed for the Mexican border, but were ordered to let them go. One distraught agent was often overheard on ATF radios begging and pleading to be allowed to intercept transports. The answer: “Negative. Stand down.”

If the George W. Bush administration had made such a blunder the BBC would have covered the story but as this is an Obama foul-up... not a word.

I have heard the theory that Obama wants the Mexican gun situation to get out of hand so he can institute gun control in the US; I am inclined to believe that to be possible.

If 'guns kill people'

Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

Reminds me of this song... 'Guns Don't Kill People, Rappers Do!' by Goldie Lookin' Chain

"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."

This story from last week was so astonishing that I expected it to receive wide media coverage but it didn't so here I go...

"A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty".

Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.

In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.

"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.

"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours.

He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".

Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?"

To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.

Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.

But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun.

He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.

"You could be walking to a railway station on the way to work and find a firearm in a bin in the park.

"Is it unreasonable to take it to the police station?"

Paul Clarke will be sentenced on December 11.

Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge.

"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.

The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.

In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested.

"I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."

The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.

In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.

"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.

"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours.

He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".

Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?"

To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.

Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.

But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun.

He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.

"You could be walking to a railway station on the way to work and find a firearm in a bin in the park.

"Is it unreasonable to take it to the police station?"

Paul Clarke will be sentenced on December 11.

Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge.

"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant.""

So it seems that a man who handed a gun, that he had found in his garden, into the police gets charged, convicted and sentenced to five years in prison for "possessing a firearm". Does nobody think that this might be a little over the top? I wonder how the judge summed up the case, can one find out? Was the jury directed to a guilty verdict via an explanation of "strict liability"?
I wonder if this is the same Paul Clarke and what light, if any, does that report shed on this case.


A contributor on Old Holborn found a news story that went a somewhat different way:

"A man who found a loaded gun linked to a gangland shooting was told by Scotland Yard to carry it across south London to a police station.

John Leary came across the weapon in a playground where it had been abandoned days after the crime. But the Met refused his request for a plain-clothes officer to collect it from his home.

Today the force admitted major failings over the matter.

Disabled Mr Leary, 51, found the weapon inside a plastic bag near his home on the Hemans estate in Stockwell. Speaking for the first time since the find, he said: "I was going to hang the bag on the railings until I felt its weight. When I looked inside there was a big revolver, a passport and some cash. It had a long barrel and I could see the chambers were loaded. There was no question of leaving it where kids play."

Immediately after finding the revolver he was confronted by gang members who tried to get him to hand it over. But he refused and called police.

Officers suggested they send a patrol car to his house, but he refused for fear of reprisals from the gang members who had seen him carry the bag away. "I told them it was more than my life was worth," said Mr Leary.

Police then advised him to go to his local station, in Larkhall Park, Wandsworth Road, but it was closed. He had to travel 2.5 miles into Clapham to Lavender Hill police station, where an officer agreed to receive the weapon. Mr Leary was taken into the Met's witness protection programme after the gang continued to target him, offering him £3,000 for the gun. They later subjected him to death threats and intimidation, forcing him to flee to his son's home."

So what would you do if you found a gun in your garden?

Ted Nugent "doesn't like repeat offenders" he likes "dead offenders"

Thanks to Donal Blaney for the spot.

Gun control?

Ever wondered why European governments (apart from Switzerland) are so keen on preventing their populations from legally owning guns, might the following quotation be a clue?


"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

-- Noah Webster, 1787 - An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution



Thanks to American Geek for the reminder.